22R0013_QA_3.1.2022.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 36 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Technology Services Organization (TSO) Business Information System Support Services Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- M9549422R0013
- Issued by
- United States Marine Corps
About this file
This solicitation requests proposals for a single award Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity contract to provide knowledge-based support services for the maintenance of highly complex, Government-designed and owned enterprise-class business critical systems. The Technology Services Organization within the United States Marine Corps requires support for software analysis, programming, debugging, software testing, software maintenance, software installation, help desk support and management, document conversion, risk management, software process improvement, quality assurance, system operations support, project management, system documentation, training, and maintenance of the systems, subsystems, and networks supported by TSO. The ordering period is anticipated to begin on or about November 14, 2022 and run for five years. Orders are expected to be issued on a firm-fixed-price and firm-fixed-price level of effort basis. The solicitation includes sample task orders for core sustainment, manpower systems, and SABRS task order support.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| M95494-22-R-0013-0002.pdf | ||
| RFP Attachment L-4_ManSys_Task_Order_PWS_AMD0001.pdf | ||
| RFP Attachment L-3_CorpEx_AMD0001.docx | DOCX document | |
| 22R0013 (RFP)_AMD0001.pdf | ||
| RFP Attachment L-4_SABRS_Task_Order_PWS_AMD0001.pdf | ||
| RFP Attachment L-4_CoreSus_Task_Order_PWS_AMD0001.pdf | ||
| RFP Attachment_L1_DD254_AMD0001.pdf | ||
| Contract Attachment 1_Appendix_A.pdf | ||
| RFP Attachment L-2_252.227-7028.docx | DOCX document | |
| RFP Attachment L-4_ManSys_Task_Order_PWS.pdf | ||
| M95494-22-R-0013 (RFP).pdf | ||
| RFP Attachment_L1_DD254.pdf | ||
| RFP Attachment L-3_CorpEx.docx | DOCX document | |
| RFP Attachment L-5_Pricing.XLSX | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| RFP Attachment L-4_CoreSus_Task_Order_PWS.pdf | ||
| RFP Attachment L-4_SABRS_Task_Order_PWS.pdf |
Show all 16
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
M9549422R0013
| # | PWS Section or | ||||
| RFP Exhibit/Att. | Pg. # | Question | Answer | ||
| 1 | RFP Section 11.3 Security Clearances, pg. 15, and RFP Attachment L1 DD254 1.b | 15 | RFP Section 11.3 says “Off-site storage of classified material is prohibited.” The DD254 requires that the Contractor safeguard at the Secret level. This appears to be a conflict in requirements. Can the Government please confirm that contractors will not need to store classified materials at the Secret level at a contractor-owned facility and remove the DD254 1.b Level of Safeguarding requirement? | Contractors will have access to classified information but will not be required to store classified information off-site/at their facility. Please see the Amendment/ DD254 updates. | |
| 2 | General | We don't have past performance in similar kinds of services as a company but we have personnel who are experts in the required scope with more than 10 years of experience, can we propose using their resumes? | Resumes are not required or anticipated in response to Factor 3, Past Performance; however, proposal content is at the offeror's discretion. Offerors are advised to follow the instructions provided under FAR 52.212-1, Addendum, of the solicitation. | ||
| 3 | General | Do we have to propose for all the tasks indicated under 2.0 Tasks or can we propose separately choosing the ones we think are our strong skills. | Proposal content is at the offeror's discretion. Offerors are advised to follow the instructions provided under FAR 52.212-1, Addendum, of the solicitation. | ||
| 4 | General | Are we required to cover all the places of performance indicated under 4.0. Place of Performance, or can we choose our preferred location at the task orders level? | In accordance with Section 4.0 of the PWS, on-site workspace allocations may be defined by the Government at the Task Order level and may include, but are not limited to, the locations indicated therein. | ||
| 5 | General | How many companies are going to be awarded under this IDIQ RFP? | In accordance with FAR 52.212-2 of the Solicitation, the Government intends to issue, if at all, a Single Award (SA) Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract. | ||
| 6 | General | Do you use a cascading methodology for set-aside opportunities? | No. | ||
| 7 | RFP Attachment L-3_CorpEx, (FORMAT/PAGE LIMIT) | 1 | Attachment L-3_CorpEx uses 10-point font size, Times New Roman. Should the Offeror use the 10-point font size used in the Government provided form or the 12-point font size stated in the form instructions? Please clarify. | Attachment L-3 has been reformatted accordingly. | |
| 8 | M95494-22-R-0013, (Clauses Incorporated by Reference) | 21 | Given the intent of 52.237-3 (Continuity of Services) is to ensure that the services must be continued without interruption, it would benefit the government to ensure that any successors offering has adequate compensation to ensure the continuity of services. Incorporating 52.222-46 as in the prior solicitation would allow the government to ensure that the compensation proposed would be adequate to enable service continuity. Would the government consider adding FAR Clause 52.222-46 to the solicitation? | FAR clause 52.222-46 is not applicable to this solicitation. The solicitation has been updated to incorporate DFARS clause 252.237-7023. | |
| 9 | M95494-22-R-0013, (RFP Instructions, Section 2)A)) | 37 | What is the largest file size that can be uploaded to the Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment (PIEE)? | In accordance with the PIEE Solicitation Module FAQs, "each uploaded attachment can be up to 1.9 gigabytes (GB) in size." | |
| 10 | M95494-22-R-0013, (RFP Instructions, Section 3)B) Proposal Format) | 38 | Can some of the information required for the footer, be included in the header? | Yes. FAR 52.212-1, Addendum has been revised. Please see the forthcoming amendment. | |
| 11 | M95494-22-R-0013, (RFP Instructions, Section 3)B) Proposal Format) | 38 | Can the captions for figures/tables follow the same font specifications for tables and graphics? | Yes, text within tables, diagrams, pictorial charts, or graphic material may use no smaller than 8-point font. | |
| 12 | M95494-22-R-0013, (RFP Instructions, Section 4)A) Proposal Content) | 40 | Can headers/footers be added to Attachment L-2 – DFARS 252.227-7028? | Yes. | |
| 13 | M95494-22-R-0013, (RFP Instructions, Section 4)B)(1)(a) Proposal Content) | 41 | Can headers/footers be added to Attachment L-3 – Corporate Experience? | Yes. | |
| 14 | Attachment L-3_CorpEx, (RFP Instructions, Section 4)B)(1), Gate Criteria 1 - Corporate Experience) | 41 | RFP states: "The Offeror shall complete and submit the Corporate Experience Form (Attachment L-3)… Failure to submit Attachment L-3 in accordance with the instructions stated therein may result in a proposal being rated “Unacceptable” and excluded from further consideration for award." - It is unclear if the Offeror is required to insert Attachment L-3 within Volume II - GATE CRITERIA, either following a heading or as an appendix to Volume II; or, if the Offeror is required to submit Attachment L-3 as a separate file/document attachment to Volume II - GATE CRITERIA. |
| Please confirm that a completed RFP Attachment L-3 is submitted as an appendix at the end of Volume II - GATE CRITERIA and that RFP Attachment L-3 does not count against the page limit for Volume II. | Attachment L-3 is not intended to be an appendix under Volume II and is included within the page limit for Volume II. | ||||
| 15 | M95494-22-R-0013, (RFP Instructions, Section 4)B)(2)(a), Small Business Subcontracting Plan) | 41 | Will the Government add clause 252.219-7004 Small Business Subcontracting Plan (Test Program) for those contractors holding a negotiated Comprehensive Small Business Subcontracting Plan? | FAR clause 252.219-7004 is not applicable to this solicitation. | |
| 16 | M95494-22-R-0013, (RFP Instructions, Section 4)B)(2)(a), Small Business Subcontracting Plan) | 41 | Regarding the Subcontracting Plan, our DCMA negotiated Comprehensive Small Business Subcontracting Plan is 44 pages long. Question (1): In which Volume does the Government want our Subcontracting Plan to be inserted into the Proposal? If in Volume II, will the Government remove the page limit requirement of 20 pages? Question (2): Is it acceptable to insert it as an appendix in that volume and/or can we include just the Cover Sheet with our signatures? | The Offeror's small business subcontracting plan is required in Volume II, per FAR 52.212-1 Addendum. The page limitation for Volume II has been increased from 20 to 30. Offerors are advised to follow the proposal format instructions provided under FAR 52.212-1, Addendum, of the solicitation. | |
| 17 | M95494-22-R-0013, (RFP Instructions, Section 4)B)(2)(b), Small Business Participation Plan) | 42 | Will the Government confirm Small Business Participation will be based on the Total Contract Value? | Small Business Participation is based on the total contract value. | |
| 18 | M95494-22-R-0013, (RFP Instructions, Section 4)B)(2)(b), Small Business Participation Plan) | 42 | Regarding the Minimum Quantitative Requirement(s) (MQRs), please confirm these are for the IDIQ as a whole and not a requirement on individual Task Orders? | The MQRs apply to the total contract value, which is at the IDIQ level. | |
| 19 | M95494-22-R-0013, (RFP Instructions, Section 4)C)(2)(c)) | 44 | Please confirm that the Letter of Intent is excluded from the 2 page limit for the resumes. | Confirmed. Letters of Intent are exempt from page limitations. | |
| 20 | M95494-22-R-0013, (RFP Instructions, Section 4)C)(3) |
Evaluation Factors, Section 3)B)(3)) 44
49 Factor 3 - Past Performance instructions and evaluation criteria appear to be in contradiction - Per RFP Instructions, "Offerors are not required to submit any additional information in response to this factor. For the evaluation of this factor, the Government will assess the Offeror’s past performance on the contracts submitted in response to Volume II, Gate Criteria." However, RFP Evaluation Criteria states "The burden of providing thorough and complete past performance information is the responsibility of the Offeror, at all times."
| What content, if any, is required in Volume III - Technical Proposal for Factor 3 - Past Performance? If content is required for Volume III - Technical Proposal for Factor 3 - Past Performance, will the Government consider increasing the page limitation for Volume III - Technical Proposal accordingly (e.g., from 35 pages to 45 pages, depending on the content requirements). | FAR 52.212-2, Addendum, (pg 49) has been revised to remove, "The burden of providing thorough and complete past performance information is the responsibility of the Offeror, at all times". Please see the forthcoming Amendment. Per FAR 52.212-1 Addendum, the government will use the information submitted by the offeror's in response to Volume II, Gate Criteria, in performing its past performance evaluation in FAR 52.212-2 Addendum. | |||
| 21 | M95494-22-R-0013, (RFP Instructions, Section 4)D)(1)) | 45 | Language states "All information relating to pricing data shall be included in Volume IV. Volume IV shall include a complete and detailed price/cost breakdown with all supporting documentation. The Price Proposal shall include all elements of cost and such other cost information as considered appropriate to support the Offeror’s Non-Price Proposal." |
| The solicitation says the Government will be evaluating price for only reasonableness. A full cost build is more typical of a cost type proposal. When full cost builds are typically required, it is to assist the Government in evaluating cost realism, however this solicitation does not include cost realism in section M. Would the Government consider removing the requirement for the full cost build, or add cost realism language into section M that defines how the cost build data will be used to assess cost realism? | FAR 52.212-1, Addendum has been revised to remove, "Volume IV shall include a complete and detailed price/cost breakdown with all supporting documentation. The Price Proposal shall include all elements of cost and such other cost information as considered appropriate to support the Offeror’s Non-Price Proposal". Please see the forthcoming Amendment. | ||||
| 22 | M95494-22-R-0013, (RFP Instructions, Section 4)D)(1)) | 45 | Language states "All information relating to pricing data shall be included in Volume IV. Volume IV shall include a complete and detailed price/cost breakdown with all supporting documentation. The Price Proposal shall include all elements of cost and such other cost information as considered appropriate to support the Offeror’s Non-Price Proposal." - The Attachment L-5 does not allow for a detailed price/cost breakdown that includes all elements of cost. If a full price build-up is required should this be provided in a separate contractor formatted excel attachment? | FAR 52.212-1, Addendum has been revised to remove, "Volume IV shall include a complete and detailed price/cost breakdown with all supporting documentation. The Price Proposal shall include all elements of cost and such other cost information as considered appropriate to support the Offeror’s Non-Price Proposal". Please see the forthcoming Amendment. | |
| 23 | M95494-22-R-0013, (RFP Instructions, Section 4)D)(1)(a)) | 45 | The instructions for the price proposals for the sample task orders states, "Provide a firm-fixed-price (FFP) proposal for each Sample Task Order and the Additional Labor Categories in the Attachment L-5, Pricing Template." It continues by instructing offerors to "…include a breakdown, by CLIN, for all labor rates and hours used to develop the price/cost breakdown for all Sample Task Orders." Given that each Sample TO tab within Attachment L-5 Pricing Template contains one CLIN for FFP and one CLIN for FFP LOE which is consistent with Page 5, Section 2 Tasks where it states, "Specific taskings may be firm-fixed-priced (FFP), FFP level of effort (LOE), or a combination of the two", the instructions "to provide a FFP proposal" appear to be in conflict with requirement to break out by CLIN as offerors would only populate the one CLIN for FFP. - Can the Government clarify whether the sample tasks are to be bid as firm-fixed-price (FFP) only? |
| OR Are sample tasks to be bid as firm-fixed-price (FFP), FFP level of effort (LOE) or a combination of both, separated by CLIN and as structured in the L-5 attachment? | FAR 52.212-1, Addendum has been revised to remove, "Provide a firm-fixed-price (FFP) proposal" and replace it with, "Provide a priced proposal". Please see the forthcoming Amendment. | ||||
| 24 | M95494-22-R-0013, (Evaluation Factors, Section 3)B) (4) (ii) Factor 4- Price (last sentence)) | 49 | The last sentence of the second paragraph in (4) (ii) that references the "Additional Labor Categories" hours and pricing states that "The awarded CLINs under this contract will be awarded as an "estimate". Can the government confirm that this sentence only applies to the "Additional Labor Categories" portion of the pricing and TEP and that the Sample Task orders, if the government chooses to award them, would be awarded at proposed prices submitted and not estimates? | No, this statement does not apply to the Additional Labor Categories. This statement pertains to the total value of each CLIN totaling up to the contract ceiling. FAR 52.212-2, Addendum has been revised accordingly. | |
| 25 | M95494-22-R-0013, (Exhibits) | 52 | CDRLS A001-AO11 are referenced as an Exhibit but the exhibit is not provided. Will the Government provide the CDRL A001-A011 Exhibit? | The CDRLs themselves do not have exhibits as indicated by Block B of each CDRL document. The CDRLs are the contract's exhibits. | |
| 26 | M95494-22-R-0013, Section 11.3 Security Clearances, pg. 15, and RFP Attachment L1 DD254 1.b | 15 | The RFP says no offsite storage of classified materials is permitted. We also understand that no storage of classified material is required or likely under the RFP. Please consider removing the safeguarding requirement in the DD 254 so that all prospective offerors can compete. | Contractors will have access to classified information, but will not be required to store classified information off-site/at their facility. Please see the Amendment/ DD254 updates. | |
| 27 | M95494-22-R-0013, Section 11.3 Security Clearances, pg. 15, and RFP Attachment L1 DD254 1.b | 15 | The DD254 states the level of safeguarding for classified information/material required at a contractor facility is "Secret." Given the high SB threshold and likelihood for teaming, will the Government allow a teaming partner or legal JV entity to satisfy this requirement? | Contractors will have access to classified information, but will not be required to store classified information off-site/at their facility. Please see the Amendment/ DD254 updates. | |
| 28 | M95494-22-R-0013, Section 11.3 Security Clearances, pg. 15, and RFP Attachment L1 DD254 1.b | 15 | The current draft DD254 is not signed and states the level of safeguarding for classified information/material required at a contractor facility is "Secret." If an offeror currently has at least a Secret FCL, but requires a signed DD254 in order to be sponsored for the Secret level Safeguarding approval, will the Government remove this as a condition of submission and sponsor an offeror to meet this requirement upon award, rather than requiring it at the time of submission? | Contractors will have access to classified information, but will not be required to store classified information off-site/at their facility. Please see the Amendment/ DD254 updates. | |
| 29 | M95494-22-R-0013, Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors or Respondents |
Section 4) Proposal Content C) Volume III – Technical Proposal
(2) Factor 2 – Management Approach
(c) Key Personnel
| 44 | Can the Government please confirm Letters of Intent for Key Personnel do not count against the page limit? | Confirmed. Letters of Intent are exempt from the page limitations. | |||
| 30 | M95494-22-R-0013, B) Volume II - Gate Criteria (1) Gate Criteria 1 - Corporate Experience (Acceptable/Unacceptable) (a) | 41 | The solicitation specifies that of the 4 contracts/task orders, “No more than one (1) contract/task order may be from a subcontractor or team member.” | ||
| Due to the substantial small business subcontracting requirements, it would benefit the Government to evaluate past performances from multiple companies that would be part of the winning team. Would the Government consider increasing the total number of corporate experience references to 5 and increase the total number of corporate experience references allowed by non-prime team members to 2 to show the depth of experience for a team of more than 2 contractors? | The total number of corporate experience references will remain at four (4); however, the total number of corporate experience references allowed by non-prime team members has been increased from one (1) to two (2). Please see the forthcoming Amendment. | ||||
| 31 | Evaluation Factors for Award, 2) Evaluation Phases, A) Phase 1 | 47 | Can the Government clarify if the Corporate Experience is essentially evaluated twice (as part of the Gate Criteria, as well as part of the Evaluation Phase 1), and evaluated three different ways (for acceptability, relevance, and confidence levels)? | Corporate Experience is not evaluated twice. In accordance with FAR 52.212-2 Addendum, the Government will first evaluate the offeror's response to Gate Criteria 1, Corporate Experience, which is a self-assessment. The Government will then utilize that information under Factor 3, Past Performance, as well as information obtained from other sources available to the Government (e.g., CPARS) to evaluate each reference, which is based on actual performance. | |
| 32 | M95494-22-R-0013, Evaluation Factors for Award, 2) Evaluation Phases, A) Phase 1 | 47 | Can the Government please confirm that the 4 past performance references will be evaluated collectively for relevancy (similarity between the service/support effort, complexity, dollar value, contract type, and subcontract/teaming or other comparable attributes) instead of each one individually needing to meet 100% of the relevancy requirements? | Each individual reference will be assigned a relevancy rating and those references combined will be used to establish one performance confidence assessment rating. | |
| 33 | M95494-22-R-0013, Attachment L-3_CorpEx, Instructions, FORMAT/PAGE LIMIT | 1 | Can the Government please clarify if the section I) Gate Criteria Corporate Experience Matrix counts towards the 12-page limit to the L-3 CorpEx form? | The Corporate Experience Matrix counts towards the 12-page limit. | |
| 34 | M95494-22-R-0013, Attachment L-5_Pricing.xlsx | Tab Additional Labor Categories | Please provide the estimated hours for Year 1 by labor category for the additional labor categories. | The Government does not predict any effort required in Year 1 for the Additional Labor Categories. Year 2 accounts for the time period in which award for the additional effort is expected. | |
| 35 | M95494-22-R-0013, Attachment L-5_Pricing.xlsx and RFP Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors or Respondents 4) Proposal Content |
D) Volume IV – Price Proposal Could the Government please provide either metrics for each subtask to support a basis of estimate or the current level of support for each subtask?
Within each Task Order's Performance Work Statement, metric data and/or size approximations have been provided, where possible, to include Fibonacci points, ticket JIRA approximations, and profile quantities.
36 M95494-22-R-0013, Attachment L-5_Pricing.xlsx and RFP Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors or Respondents 4) Proposal Content D) Volume IV – Price Proposal
| As this is a GOGOCS contract, to accurately estimate the contractor LOE, could the Government please provide the current levels of Government staff allocated at each subtask level? | No, this information can not be provided at this time. | |
| 37 | M95494-22-R-0013, Attachment L-5_Pricing.xlsx and RFP Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors or Respondents 4) Proposal Content |
D) Volume IV – Price Proposal
| Tab Additional Labor Categories | Can the Government please clarify if the expectation is that offerors propose additional labor categories other than those specified in the “Additional Labor Categories” tab? Or are offerors limited to only using the labor categories described under the “Additional Labor Categories” tab? | Offerors may propose labor categories for the sample task orders at their discretion; however, they are limited to providing rates for the categories provided under the Additional Labor Categories tab. |
| 38 | M95494-22-R-0013, Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors or Respondents |
Section 4) Proposal Content C) Volume III – Technical Proposal
(2) Factor 2 – Management Approach
(c) Key Personnel 44 The Government states, “(ii) Offerors shall provide Letters of Intent (LOI) for all Key personnel. The LOIs shall be signed by the proposed individual and contain their name and assigned labor category…The Government considers the submission of LOIs for proposed contingent Key Personnel to be material to the proposal since these LOIs demonstrate the Offeror’s ability to hire personnel with the qualifications proposed at the salary proposed.” Additionally, the general instructions require bidders to not include any price/cost information under Volume III submission.
a) Can the Government please confirm that no salary information is to be provided in the LOI under Volume III?
| b) Can the Government also please confirm that salary information shall only be provided as part of an offeror’s Volume IV price submission and will only be evaluated as part of the price submission? | No salary information is required within LOIs. Per FAR 52.212-1 Addendum, Volumes II and III shall not provide any pricing information and all information relating to pricing information data shall be included in Volume IV. | |
| 39 | M95494-22-R-0013, Attachment L-5_Pricing.xlsx and RFP Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors or Respondents 4) Proposal Content |
D) Volume IV – Price Proposal 45 The Government states that “Price Proposals for the Sample Task Orders and Additional Labor Categories – Provide a firm fixed-price (FFP) proposal for each Sample Task Order and the Additional Labor Categories in the Attachment L-5, Pricing Template.”
(a) Per instructions in D) (1) (a) for Attachment L-5, can the Government please confirm that the bidders are only required to complete the FFP CLIN 0001 tables for each sample task order in addition to the additional labor categories and that no pricing is required under the FFP LOE CLIN 0002 tables?
| (b) If the Government wants both FFP and FFP LOE for the Sample Task Orders, can the Government please delineate which subtasks under each task order should be FFP vs. FFP LOE? | Offerors may propose FFP and FFP LOE rates at their discretion. FAR 52.212-1, Addendum has been revised to remove "Provide a firm-fixed-price (FFP) proposal" and replace it with, "Provide a priced proposal". Please see the forthcoming Amendment. | |||
| 40 | Base Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Performance Work Statement (PWS) for Business Information Systems Support Services Section 14.0 Non-Personnel Services, Item D) Labor Category and Rate information | 18 | The RFP states, "The proposed labor rates for the Sample Task Orders and the Additional Labor Categories in Attachment L-5 will become the established fixed-priced ceiling rates for the entire ordering period and shall apply to all Task Orders issued under this contract.” |
a) Will this fixed-price ceiling on labor rates also apply for the labor price breakdown under the FFP CLIN 0001 or just the rates provided for the Additional Labor Categories?
b) Will the Government change the fixed-priced ceiling rates criteria to only apply on the rates provided under the additional labor categories? Alternatively, can the Government revise pricing instructions to also require bidders to add the labor categories utilized for each sample task order under the Additional Labor Category tab with their fixed-priced ceiling rates but without any hours assigned against them? a) The fixed-price ceiling rates will be based on the proposed labor rates for both the Sample Task Orders and the Additional Labor Categories.
b) No. No.
41 M95494-22-R-0013, Attachment L-5_Pricing.xlsx and RFP Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors or Respondents 4) Proposal Content D) Volume IV – Price Proposal
| 45 | The Base IDIQ requires a key PM position, however, the Attachment L-5 spreadsheet does not provide a place for a cost estimate for this position. To ensure an allocated recovery of the cost of resources required for the base contract (e.g., Program Manager) from the respective Task Order, can the Government please provide a percentage of each sample task order scope it individually represents in comparison to the total contract scope (sample task orders plus future task orders)? | The Base IDIQ PM position supports all Task Orders issued under this IDIQ. The PM, and any other key personnel, should be priced at the Task Order level. |
| 42 | M95494-22-R-0013, Attachment L-5_Pricing.xlsx and RFP Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors or Respondents 4) Proposal Content |
D) Volume IV – Price Proposal
| 45 | Can the Government please clarify if the offeror can propose additional IDIQ level personnel? | No; however, Offerors have the discretion to add labor categories at the Task Order level. | ||
| 43 | M95494-22-R-0013, Section 4.B.2 | 41-42 | Per FAR clause 52.219-9 (d), can the Government confirm that the Minimum Quantitative Requirements (MQR) percentages in this section are percentages of the total subcontracted dollars rather than a percentage of total contract value? | Small Business Participation is based on the total IDIQ contract value. |
| 44 | Attachment L-4_CoreSus_Task_Order_PWS.pdf | 7 | Per Task 1 2.5 Cyber Security, the contractor shall provide independent validation of the BIS per the following schedule: |
BIS Date of Commencement - Date of Completion
MCTFS: 11/21/2022 - 01/20/2023
TSO Production: 01/30/2023 - 03/21/2023 TSO PjMS: 07/05/2023 - 09/08/2023
| Could the Government please clarify if the Cyber Security support is a one-time task to be performed only in the Base Year, or does it occur in all the Option Years as well? | 2.5. has been updated. Support is anticipated for each option period under this Task Order. | ||||
| 45 | Attachment L-4_CoreSus_Task_Order_PWS.pdf | 10 | “Travel under this Task Order shall be in accordance with Section 13.0 of the Contract. TSO estimates that twenty (10) trips averaging four (4) days per trip will be required to Indianapolis, IN and (10) trips averaging four (4) days per trip will be required to Quantico, VA to support technical collaboration sessions that cannot be effectively accomplished via remote means.” Do the mentioned travel requirements refer to 1 period of performance (Base for example) or over all periods of performance? | The estimate provided is per period of performance. Paragraph 13.0 has been updated to correct a typo from "twenty (10) trips" to "ten (10) trips". | |
| 46 | Attachment L-4_ManSys_Task_Order_PWS.pdf | 3 | 2.2.1 MOL Architecture and Engineering Support: The Contractor shall provide architecture and engineering support to ten (10), four (4) week sprints. | ||
| Please provide the unit (e.g., annually) over which these sprints should be supported? | The estimate provided is at the annual level. | ||||
| 47 | Attachment L-4_ManSys_Task_Order_PWS.pdf | 3 | Sample Task Order 2, Manpower Systems states “…approximately eleven thousand eight hundred (11,800) points worth of stories on the Fibonacci scale…” | ||
| For estimating purposes, can the Government provide the unit over which these points worth of stories should be supported (monthly, annually, etc.)? | The estimate provided is at the annual level. | ||||
| 48 | Attachment L-4_ManSys_Task_Order_PWS.pdf | 3,4 | 2.2.2 Software Sustainment Support - The Contractor shall provide software sustainment support utilizing Agile-Scrum methodologies. The Contractor shall provide approximately eleven thousand eight hundred (11,800) points worth of stories on the Fibonacci scale…The total workload will be split across the BISs programming languages as follows. Programming Languages Fibonacci Points C# 1620, C++ 180, Fortran 180, Java 8,460, Power Builder 360. | ||
| The individual Fibonacci points across BIS programming languages do not add-up to 11,800. Could the Government please provide corrected estimations? | Attachment L-4_ManSys_Task_Order_PWS.pdf has been updated to reflect Java in the amount of 9,460. | ||||
| 49 | Attachment L-4_ManSys_Task_Order_PWS.pdf | 2,3 | In Task Order 2, Sections 2.1.4 and 2.2.2 are in conflict regarding estimating Workload for development efforts. Can the Government please provide a conversion factor for points to hours that the incumbent/Government has used in the past? |
2.1.4 Estimates for Software Release and Standalone Software Change Requests:
The Contractor shall provide hour estimates within the MCTFS Estimating Management System (EMS) on all Software Release and Standalone Software Change Requests (SCRs) as assigned and include all replacement pages and addenda provided by the functional customer. This estimate will include Design, Programming, and/or Test tasks depending on what portions are tasked to the Contractor.
| 2.2.2 Software Sustainment Support: The Contractor shall provide software sustainment support utilizing Agile-Scrum methodologies. The Contractor shall provide approximately eleven thousand eight hundred (11,800) points worth of stories on the Fibonacci scale. | The historical delivery rate is 180 Fibonacci Points per staff year. | ||||
| 50 | Attachment L-4_ManSys_Task_Order_PWS.pdf | 4 | “This system’s sustainment team operates on an iterative sprint cycle and releases to production as-needed...This system’s sustainment team operates on a monthly sprint cycle and releases to production monthly.” When there is no explicit time specification for the iterative sprint cycle, can the Government provide examples of the durations for the sprint cycles other than the mentioned monthly cycle? | Other examples would be two and three week sprint cycles. | |
| 51 | Attachment L-4_ManSys_Task_Order_PWS.pdf | 6 | 2.4.1 Business Process Analysis - “The Contractor shall complete approximately four thousand (4,000) tasks during the period of performance.” Can the Government please provide a definition of a task for the purposes of estimating and any historical level of effort associated with the tasks? Does the period of performance refer to 1 period of performance (Base for example) or all periods of performance? | The 18 items listed would be made up of the 4,000 tasks listed in 2.4.1. |
This is for one option period.
| 52 | Attachment L-4_SABRS_Task_Order_PWS.pdf | 2 | “The Contractor shall provide approximately 500 points worth of stories on the Fibonacci scale.” Can the Government provide the unit over which these points worth of stories should be supported (monthly, annually, etc.)? | The estimate provided is at the annual level. |
| 53 | Attachment L-4_SABRS_Task_Order_PWS.pdf | 3 | 2.3.1 Mainframe Production Control Support states the following: |
- 654 jobs, daily cycle
- 454 jobs, weekly cycle
- 534 jobs, quarterly cycle
- 565 jobs, weekly cycle
| Can the Government confirm the last duplicate “weekly” reference of 565 jobs is in fact based on annual cycle? | Attachment L-4_SABRS_Task_Order_PWS.pdf has been updated from "565 Jobs, weekly cycle" to "565 jobs, annual cycle". | ||||
| 54 | M95494-22-R-0013, SF 1449; Proposal Due Date | 1 | Will the Government please provide a three-week extension to the proposal submission deadline allowing offerors time to incorporate any changes to the RFP after Q&A responses are posted? | Please see the forthcoming Amendment, which grants a two week extension. | |
| 55 | M95494-22-R-0013, Base Contract PWS 2.2; Attach L-4 PWS 2.1.1 | 6 & 2 | Can the Government provide a list of TSO systems that are currently in a Cloud environment? | Currently, no TSO systems are in a cloud environment. | |
| 56 | M95494-22-R-0013, Base Contract PWS 2.1 | Can the Government provide the software development methodologies (agile, iterative, waterfall, etc.) that TSO apps follow, by application? | MCTFS follows a hybrid iterative/waterfall methodology. All other systems follow variants of Agile. | ||
| 57 | Attachment L-4 SABRS PWS Sec 2.3.3 | 4 | Can the Government provide a list or number of Information Management System in-house documents that require maintenance for estimation purposes? | Attachment L-4 SABRS PWS Sec 2.3.3 and Attachment L-4_CoreSus_Task_Order_PWS.pdf Sec 2.2.3. have been updated. | |
| 58 | M95494-22-R-0013, Base Contract PWS 3.4, 5.0 | 9 | The RFP calls for a 90-day transition plan in PWS section 3.4. In section 5.0 the Government states the ordering period will begin on/about 14 November 2022 which is the same date publicly listed information shows for end of the incumbent contract. Can the Government confirm that the transition period will overlap with incumbent performance to complete knowledge transfer as required in section 3.4? | It's the Government's intent to afford the incoming contractor adequate time for a transition phase in accordance with the awarded transition plan. | |
| 59 | Task Order 1; Task Order 3 | 3 & 4 | Are products other than IBM ISPW and Treehouse Software N2O Software Change Management used on the IBM z/OS environments - Core Sustainment? | No. | |
| 60 | M95494-22-R-0013, Base Contract PWS 2.6 | 7 | Which Continuous Integration/Continuous Deployment (CI/CD) tools are already established within the TSO's MCTFS/SABRS SDLC for CI/CD in the IBM z/OS environments? | ISPW and Topaz Workbench are being used for MCTFS SDLC CI/CD. No CI/CD tools are being used for SABRS. | |
| 61 | Task Order 1; Task Order 3 | 3 & 4 | What DB2/Adabase performance monitoring and tuning tools are currently implemented by TSO? | DB2 - Tools such as Mainview and Strobe. ADABAS uses tools such as Treehouse Trim. | |
| 62 | M95494-22-R-0013, Section 1.2 Scope | 5 | On page 5 of the RFP, Section 1.2 Scope, it says "The services to be acquired fall within the scope of...help desk support and management..." Can the Government please provide which specific help desk support (i.e., Tier 0, 1, 2, etc.) is required for each of the tasks and provide the historical level of help desk tickets per application per tier? | Helpdesk support is not currently included in the three Sample Task Orders. | |
| 63 | Contract Attachment 1, Appendix A | What security subsystem is on z/os? Does the TSO contractor need to support the Cybersecurity on this system? | Cybersecurity for mainframe systems is not currently included in the three Sample Task Orders. | ||
| 64 | M95494-22-R-0013, Section L B) (1) (a) | 41 | "…master contract vehicles (e.g., Blanket Purchase Agreements, Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity contracts) will not satisfy the Gate Criteria, Corporate Experience criteria" Because this solicitation is for a single award IDIQ, would the Government consider allowing single award IDIQ contracts as Corporate Experience references, particularly to align with size and scope requirements? | In accordance with FAR 52.212-1 Addendum, the Offeror’s Corporate Experience noted within Attachment L-3 shall be for the performance of actual technical requirements. | |
| 65 | M95494-22-R-0013, (3) Evaluation Criteria Exhibits "CDRLs A001 – A011" | 52 | Will the Government please provide the CDRLs listed as "Exhibits" in the RFP document? | The CDRLs themselves do not have exhibits as indicated by Block B of each CDRL document. The CDRLs are the contract's exhibits. | |
| 66 | M95494-22-R-0013, (2) Gate Criteria 2 – Small Business Utilization, (a) Small Business Subcontracting Plan | 42 | Can the Government confirm the total small business percentage of 39% represents subcontracted labor dollars against the $155M ceiling value. | Confirmed. It is based on the total IDIQ contract value. | |
| 67 | M95494-22-R-0013, (b) Staffing Approach "The Offeror shall provide an explanation detailing how its proposed labor mixes will meet the requirements of the PWS." | 44 | Can the Government please confirm that the staffing matrix requested does not count towards the page limits as defined in the RFP? | The Staffing Matrix is included in the page limitations | |
| 68 | Attachment L-5 | Please clarify whether the tab, "Additional Labor Categories" is intended to contain the totality of the LCATs to be used across the three Sample TOs, or whether Offerors may use LCATs in the Sample TOs that are not included in the tab, "Additional Labor Categories." | Offerors may propose labor categories for the Sample Task Orders at their discretion; however, they are limited to providing rates for the categories provided under the Additional Labor Categories tab. | ||
| 69 | M95494-22-R-0013, and Task Orders, Section 6.0 Key Personnel | Can the Government please confirm that vendors may propose the same Key Personnel (e.g., PM and Senior Mainframe Application Engineer) across multiple sample Task Orders and price the Sample Task Orders accordingly? | Offerors have discretion on proposing the same labor categories across multiple sample Task Orders. If the offeror intends to propose the same individual (i.e., key person) across multiple Sample Task Orders, then that should be described and priced accordingly within the appropriate Volume. | ||
| 70 | Attachment L-4 | The Sample Task Orders include a number of Key Personnel Roles that do not appear to relate to any of the labor categories contained in Attachment L-5. Please confirm that offerors may propose additional labor categories for the STOs that align to the requirements of each STO, and are wholly different from the Labor Categories contained within the Attachment L-5 tab, Additional Labor Categories. | Offerors may propose labor categories for the Sample Task Orders at their discretion; however, they are limited to providing rates for the categories provided under the Additional Labor Categories tab. | ||
| 71 | Attachment L-5 | Attachment L-5, Additional Labor Categories tab, specifies a location of Indianapolis, IN for all labor categories. The RFP calls out other locations, such as Kansas City and Quantico. Please clarify or confirm the following: |
1. Do the rates contained in the Additional Labor Categories tab apply only to work done in or near (within 50 miles of) Indianapolis, IN?
2. How does the Government intend to evaluate labor rates applicable to the other geographic locations identified in the RFP, if not included in Attachment L-5? 1. Yes.
2. The places of performance have been provided at the Task Order level. Please refer to the Performance Work Statements for each Task Order.
| 72 | Attachment L-5 | Attachment L-5 indicates that offerors are to define each of the Labor Categories. If the Government will not provide labor category qualifications to establish a common understanding of expectations across the offering community, would the government clarify how they will evaluate vastly different labor definitions and qualifications received from offerors? | Per FAR 52.212-2 Addendum, the Offeror will be evaluated on how effectively their Management Approach meets the requirements in 52.212-1, Addendum. The Labor Category Definitions within Attachment L-5 are intended to facilitate evaluating how effectively the Offeror’s Management Approach meets the requirements such as appropriate skillsets and technical expertise. | |
| 73 | Attachment L-5 | Please confirm that the vendor is to propose labor category titles and descriptions that align with the scope for the sample TOs and the description for the additional labor categories. | Confirmed. | |
| 74 | M95494-22-R-0013, Evaluation Factors for Award | 46 | Please confirm that the Core Sustainment, Manpower Systems and SABRS Task sample task orders are expected to be awarded at the time of the IDIQ award. | 52.212-2 states "The Government anticipates award of any or all of the Sample Task Orders herein. Additionally, the Government reserves the right to issue one or more of these Sample Task Orders, any part thereof or none, in the resultant contract." |
| 75 | General | Will the Government provide historical level of efforts for the Core Sustainment, Manpower Systems, and SABRS Task Orders? | Within each Task Order's Performance Work Statement, metric data and/or size approximations have been provided, where possible, to include Fibonacci points, ticket JIRA approximations, and profile quantities. | |
| 76 | General | Would the Government please grant a 2 week extension to enable vendors sufficient time to review the government's answers to Q&A and the CDRLs? | Please see the forthcoming Amendment, which grants a two week extension. | |
| 77 | M95494-22-R-0013, Pg 41, Gate Criteria 2 | 41 | Page 41, Gate Criteria 2 – Small Business Utilization: Given the importance of Volume II, will the Government exclude the SB Plan from the 20-page limitation? | The Gate Criteria 2 page limitation has been increased to 30. Please see forthcoming Amendment. |
| 78 | M95494-22-R-0013, Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors or Respondents | 37 | Consistent with the provisions of FAR Part 12, please confirm that offerors are only required to provide their fully burdened loaded hourly rates inclusive of all labor and labor related costs in support of their proposed labor pricing. | Yes. In accordance with FAR 52.212-2 addendum, "Prices for all Sample Task Orders and the Additional Labor Categories must be fully burdened, meaning inclusive of all Overhead, General and Administrative costs, Profit, and any other indirect cost or cost element." |
| 79 | M95494-22-R-0013, Volume III - Technical Proposal, (2) Factor 2 - Management Approach | 43 | Please confirm that the Excel staffing plan matrix for each of the Sample Task Orders and the Letter of Intent (LOI) for all key personnel are excluded from the 35 page limit for Volume III. | Letters of Intent are exempt from page limitations. The Staffing Matrix is included in the page limitations. |
| 80 | RFP, Pg 5, Section 2.0 Tasks | 5 | Please confirm that the vendor may select how to price the Sample Task Orders relative to the contract type options presented. | Confirmed. Offerors may propose an entirely FFP or FFP LOE solution or a combination of both at their discretion. |
| 81 | M95494-22-R-0013, Section 1.2 Scope | Section 1.2 Scope indicates support for helpdesk support and management. Will the Government please provide the tasks associated with this scope area and associated ticket volumes? | Helpdesk support is not currently included in the three Sample Task Orders. | |
| 82 | M95494-22-R-0013, Section D) Volume IV - Price Proposal, (1) Factor 4 - Price | Volume IV asks for the offeror's DCAA point of contact. As a FAR 12 acquisition, could the Government clarify and explain why DCAA information is necessary? | Please see DFARS PGI 215.404-2, Data to Support Proposal Analysis. | |
| 83 | Travel | For travel, after award will the contractor be reimbursed for overhead rate (G&A) related to actual travel costs? | Please see Base IDIQ PWS paragraph 13.0, Travel Reimbursement. | |
| 84 | Travel | Can offerors assume 100% of the work will be at Government facilities? | Place of performance is specified at the Task Order level | |
| 85 | DD254 | Section 1b of the DD254 states there is Secret level safeguarding at the contractor facility. Section 11a contradicts the secret level safeguarding stated in section 1b, by indicating there is no access or safeguarding required at the contractor facility. Can the Government clarify whether or not classified work will be required to be performed at the contractor facility? | Contractors will have access to classified information but will not be required to store classified information off-site/at their facility. Please see the Amendment/ DD254 updates. | |
| 86 | Attachment L-4_CoreSus_Task_Order_PWS.pdf | 2 | Three infrastructure systems are listed: ADTE, PjMS and TSO Production. Is the Offeror expected to provide infrastructure support for ADTE and PjMS; given only TSO Production infrastructure tasks are listed? | Section 2.1.1 should provide support to the BISs listed in 1.1.2 as well as a of the BISs in 1.1.1 that have their own dedicated infrastructure (all systems other than MCTFS and MOL). |
| 87 | Attachment L-4_CoreSus_Task_Order_PWS.pdf | 2 | Page 2 mentions both a “traditional data center” and a “cloud environment.” Can the Government please provide additional details around the required cloud environment support, compared to the traditional data center? For example, is it a 90/10% split or a 10/90% split? | Currently, no TSO systems are in a cloud environment. |
| 88 | Attachment L-4_ManSys_Task_Order_PWS.pdf | 3 | Page 3 states that “The Contractor shall provide approximately eleven thousand eight hundred (11,800) points worth of stories on the Fibonacci scale.” Can the Government clarify if the 11,800 story points to be conducted annually or throughout the life of the contract? | The estimate provided is at the annual level. |
| 89 | Attachment L-4_ManSys_Task_Order_PWS.pdf | 4 | Page 4 shows the table listing out “the total workload will be split across the BISs programming languages,” has a total of 10,800 story points. Can the Government confirm if the number of story points should be 11,800 or 10,800? | Attachment L-4_ManSys_Task_Order_PWS.pdf has been updated to reflect Java in the amount of 9,460. |
M95494-19-R-0020 Marine Corps Recruiting Command - Advertising Support Questions & Answers
| FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY | SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION |
| SEE FAR 2.101 & 3.104 |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .